Third Name Listed for ATG XI

[Agent Nationaux]

Why would you want a representation from all eras? That's just silly!!!

 

[kyear2]

I guess we all knew the results of this survey on CW.....there isn't a clear cut 3rd name for the ATXI here on CW

Even though there seems to be no consensus third name on CW (even though journalist/past players etc seem to favor Hobbs and Marshall) there seems even more to be a consensus core group.

Outside of CW (the aforementioned professionals) the accepted core is Hobbs, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Warne. CW definitively adds Imran to that list (and argues Murali's case against Warne) and this cricket community is as knowledgeable as any. Agents and Pews assertions that I am obsessed aside, that leaves us with 9/11 spots in place though I also freely admit that there is nothing close to a consensus for the remaining two spots.

The first one being for Hobbs opening partner has only two serious contenders but about four overall. Hutton, Gavaskar, Richards and Sutcliffe.

The second position as Marshall's new ball partner is much more crowded, McGrath, Barnes, Lillee and Akram are the prime candidates and are joined by Ambrose, Steyn and Hadlee in contention. Possibly Trueman as well though his name is very rarely seen in these conditions.

 

[kyear2]

I'll admit Marshall was greatest, but If I am to pick someone for a match, I'd rather pick the guy who had the greatest peak ever. Wasim on the other hand fits in comfortably because he was the most skilful/complete fast bowler of all time and is a leftie.

Fair enough. And I agree that if I had to pick an attack to play a match tomorrow it probably would be Marshall, Lillee, Wasim and Warne.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Wasim and Lillee to open the bowling. You always moan about Wasim's stats but when any ATG batsman is asked who was the toughest bowler they ever faced, they all cry Wasim. Maybe he doesn't have the best stats because batsmen played him more carefully than other bowlers. He was nifty with the new ball and will put pressure on the top order. This will allow Lillee to get the wickets (although he doesn't really need Wasim to create the pressure to get the wickets). For the old ball, Wasim and Waqar and run riot and make sure that tail-enders don't score at all.

There is no better combination.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Fair enough. And I agree that if I had to pick an attack to play a match tomorrow it probably would be Marshall, Lillee, Wasim and Warne.

Did you not just say Imran a moment ago?

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Although that is still an excellent attack.

 

[watson]

Such a hard poll but I eventually chose Hobbs. Of all the batter positions, the opener is most probably the only specialist position in the whole game and requires a certain skill set to accomplish. Alot of people will point out specialist wicket keepers to me but I'm sure it hasn't escaped your notice that nowadays, everyone seems to be a reserve wicket keeper. After having seen Hashim Amla stand WK for SAF, I'm convinced that there is a wicket keeper in every cricketer just dying to express themselves!

For me, the specialist opener can theoretically bat anywhere, other batsmen can't. Given Hobb's proficiency in this opener position, he stands head above his peers in re-affirming the importance of getting the innings off to a good start and protecting the middle order from that new ball.

I wasn't particularly interested in choosing a bowler because their is no significant measure that separates the top 10 bowlers. All of them could most probably get the job done.

While Gilchrist's batting sure does entertain, his claim to being the preeminent wk of the ages is doubtful. Besides, I would rather balance my team choosing the wicket keeper last and so choose a wicket keeper based on whether the team needed more batting re-enforcement or not i.e., choose a specialist wk or batting wk.

Clever post!

 

[kyear2]

Did you not just say Imran a moment ago?

Would not be picked for my ATG XI because that's a combination of skills, stats and historical and anecdotal standing. Then it is definitely Marshall, McGrath/Barnes, Imran.
From a purely skill and determination and x factor then yes. Marshall, Lillee and Akram.
Similarly many would choose Hobbs and Hutton/Gavaskar as the openers, but of a game was to be played tomorrow I would choose Barry Richards over all of them and Hobbs would open with him.

 

[kyear2]

Wasim and Lillee to open the bowling. You always moan about Wasim's stats but when any ATG batsman is asked who was the toughest bowler they ever faced, they all cry Wasim. Maybe he doesn't have the best stats because batsmen played him more carefully than other bowlers. He was nifty with the new ball and will put pressure on the top order. This will allow Lillee to get the wickets (although he doesn't really need Wasim to create the pressure to get the wickets). For the old ball, Wasim and Waqar and run riot and make sure that tail-enders don't score at all.

There is no better combination.

Marshall was a better new ball bowler than anyone (imo) so how is Akram who took a relatively low proportion of top order batsmen and a much lower strike rate the better new ball bowler in the best combination. As a old ball bowler he would be ideal behind the aforementioned Lillee as Cricinfo decided. LH variety and reverse swing coupled with Warne's wiles would be close to unplayable with the old ball. Especially after the shock value of Marshall and Lillee with the new ball.

 

[watson]

Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Wasim Akram
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerWicketAnalysisGraph.asp?PlayerID=0029

Malcolm Marshall
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Dennis Lillee
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Quite surprised. Where do we get our perceptions from?

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Severe lack of hadlee love here, so I am going to fulfil my patriotic expectations.

best ever atg pace attack:

Marshall
Hadlee
Akram.

Hadlee was everything McGrath was, 6 balls an over in the corridor of uncertainty, relentless accuracy moving it both ways etc etc. However Hadlee had the extreme disadvantage of being the only legitimate threat, meaning that a.) Batsmen could play him out and b.) that he had to go searching for wicket taking deliveries rather than sticking to the corridor, which imo is why McGrath is generally regarded as the better bowler. (That and that he's Australian h35r: )

 

[kyear2]

Well Wisden chose
Marshall
Barnes
Akram

Cricinfo choose
Lillee
Marshall
Akram

Geoffrey Armstrong chose
Marshall
Barnes
Imran

Boycott chose
Marshall
Lillee
Barnes

So infinite possibilities. Though the same 5 names repeats them selves.

 

[kyear2]

Why would you want a representation from all eras? That's just silly!!!

Because cricket didn't start in 1970 and Barnes was just as dominant in his era as McGrath was his and stood above his contemporaries even more than McGrath did. But it is a close contest between the two with no right answer.

 

[Unomaas]

Severe lack of hadlee love here, so I am going to fulfil my patriotic expectations.

best ever atg pace attack:

Marshall
Hadlee
Akram.

Hadlee was everything McGrath was, 6 balls an over in the corridor of uncertainty, relentless accuracy moving it both ways etc etc. However Hadlee had the extreme disadvantage of being the only legitimate threat, meaning that a.) Batsmen could play him out and b.) that he had to go searching for wicket taking deliveries rather than sticking to the corridor, which imo is why McGrath is generally regarded as the better bowler. (That and that he's Australian h35r: )

The Hadlee claim/theory that you are putting forward is actually credible. The example I would use is Steyn and Philander. Steyn's potency has been exceptional since Philander made his debut and Philander never ever took a 10 wicket haul until he started bowling with Steyn. Together as a pair, they are carnage. Totally agree with your assessment that Hadlee > Magrath.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Because cricket didn't start in 1970 and Barnes was just as dominant in his era as McGrath was his and stood above his contemporaries even more than McGrath did. But it is a close contest between the two with no right answer.

Cricket may not have started in the 70's but taking players from all eras for the sake of it and because you have to cover all eras is silly. That's like saying taking a player from each nation to cover them all. Just take the best players regardless of the era.

 

[watson]

Cricket may not have started in the 70's but taking players from all eras for the sake of it and because you have to cover all eras is silly. That's like saying taking a player from each nation to cover them all. Just take the best players regardless of the era.

I agree that no ATG team should be picked by some kind of 'affirmative action'.

However, players like SF Barnes justify themselves by most measures. He was dominant as McGrath, as accurate as McGrath, probably not as fast as McGrath, but more than made up for it by his unparalleled variation.

 

[watson]

Severe lack of hadlee love here, so I am going to fulfil my patriotic expectations.

best ever atg pace attack:

Marshall
Hadlee
Akram.

Hadlee was everything McGrath was, 6 balls an over in the corridor of uncertainty, relentless accuracy moving it both ways etc etc. However Hadlee had the extreme disadvantage of being the only legitimate threat, meaning that a.) Batsmen could play him out and b.) that he had to go searching for wicket taking deliveries rather than sticking to the corridor, which imo is why McGrath is generally regarded as the better bowler. (That and that he's Australian h35r: )

Ewen Chatfield might be a bit miffed that you forgot about him. Admittedly not the best Strike Rate, but his excellent accuracy kept the pressure on the batting side, thus making it easier for Hadlee.

Lance Cairns was also an effective partner for Hadlee, although I don't think that he was quite as good as Chatfield;

This is the only pair in which one bowler, Cairns, has got all his wickets, bowling with the other bowler. He bowled, by himself, in one match (#758) and got 0 for 44. As expected Hadlee dominates by a huge factor of 14-2. I myself am interested in knowing about those two occasions. In match # 958, Cairns took 7 for 74 and Hadlee 0 for 44. A few matches later Cairns captured 7 for 143 and Hadlee, 2 for 97. That is all.

They did quite well at home and held their own away from home. There is no doubt Hadlee was the mainstay but Cairns played the supporting role very effectively.

Hadlee & Cairns have never captured all 10 wickets in an innings. Their best innings performance has been Test # 875 against West Indies at Christchurch during 1980 when they captured 9 for 143 (3 for 58 & 6 for 85). Their best match performance has been 14 wickets (11 and 3) in the earlier match of that series, Test # 873 at Dunedin. A rare win for New Zealand over the mighty West Indies.

Blogs: Top bowling pairs at work: a fresh look | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Ewen Chatfield might be a bit miffed that you forgot about him. Admittedly not the best Strike Rate, but his excellent accuracy kept the pressure on the batting side, thus making it easier for Hadlee.

Lance Cairns was also an effective partner for Hadlee, although I don't think that he was quite as good as Chatfield;

They were both decent bowlers and Chatfield was great at keeping things tight and building pressure, but they were nothing compared to even Lee or McDermott, let alone Gillespie and Warne

 

[Burgey]

Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Wasim Akram
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Malcolm Marshall
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Dennis Lillee
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Quite surprised. Where do we get our perceptions from?

McGrath
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Seems a combination of McGrath and Marshall might be a tad challenging.

 

[watson]

McGrath
HowSTAT! Wickets by Batting Order Graph

Seems a combination of McGrath and Marshall might be a tad challenging.

Take Michael Atherton out of the equation though, and that 'Top Order' percentage of wickets for McGrath would plummet from 40% to about 0.5%.